ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015

Italian Language in Istria: Status Planning, Corpus Planning and Acquisition Planning

Dr. Nada Poropat Jeletic

Juraj Dobrila University of Pula [email protected]

Doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n2s5p385

Abstract

The geopolitical features and the historical cohabitation of the Slavic and Romance ethnic and socio-cultural components in the Croatian Istria County marked the overall heterogeneity of the multicultural and multilingual Istrian territory. A particulary important issue regarding language planning and policy is the statutary official status of the Italian language, besides Croatian. This paper focuses on analyzing language policies and practices based on status planning, acquisition planning and corpus planning. Language planning in the context of the Croatian-Italian bilingualism in Istria is considered significant the role of the legal system which guarantees the preservation of the Italian language as the language of the social environment, helping to create the conditions for its use and the availability of its services, ensuring linguistic rights to the members of the Italian national community, the only (autochthonous) national community in Istria (status planning). In order to determine and increase its prestige on the social level, learning Italian as the language of the social environment is encouraged among members of the majority in Croatian language teaching schools, for broadening its knowledge and the use of available services for a wider range of users (acquisition planning). The least efforts are applied to the development of attempts to ensure and expand its use within various social language functions (corpus planning). Although Italian is institutionally protected and its teaching is widely encouraged, the goal of its application in everyday socialization remains unreached.

Keywords: language planning, Istria, Italian, Istrovenetian.

1. Introduction

The geopolitical features and centuries of cohabitation of the Slavic and Romance ethnic components in the Croatian Istria County marked the overall heterogeneity of the multicultural and multilingual Istrian territory. From 1994 the Croatian-Italian bilingualism is recognized not only de jure, but it is de facto realized at the social and institutional level. The application of the institutional Croatian-Italian bilingualism, claimed to be a part of the socio-political, socioeconomic and administrative system (Orbanic, 1999: 45), is marked by legal policy regulations and the specific sociocultural and sociolinguistic settings characterized by the autochthonous presence of the Italian national community1 (Blagoni, 2001; 2007). The Istrian sociolinguistic context is thus complex and fragmented. Language planning and policy are characterized by the particular heteroglossic diversity and the complex interrelations of the Istrian linguistic repertoire. Beside the two official standard languages Croatian (the language of the majority) and Italian (the language of the Italian national minority and the language of the social environment for the majority), other national languages are used: the minority alochtonous languages such as Serbian, Bosnian, Slovenian, Albanian, Macedonian, etc. Relevant is the ethnolinguistic vitality of the macroregional or panregional dialects (Chakavian dialect and Istrovenetian dialect) (Orbanic, 1999). Besides them, microregional (Chakavian, Kajkavian and Shtokavian) dialects and local dialects (the Istriot dialect, the Istroromanian dialect, the Montenegrian dialect of Peroj) are spoken2 (Blagoni, 2001; 2007).

2. Bilingualism and Heteroglossic Diversity in Istria

2.1 Bilingualism vs. diglossia

Before describing the heteroglossic diversity in Istria, it is necessary to define the fundamental distinction between bilingualism and diglossia (Ferguson, 1959; 1977; Fishman, 1967; 1970; 1971; 1972;). Bilingualism assumes the coexistence of two linguistic codes with equal status, while diglossia (or functional bilingualism) implies the complementary relation between two language varieties; each one has a specific social function, in accordance with the applied communicative rules shared by a given speaking community, and is used only in certain domains (while in bilingual settings the two varieties are equally interchangeable in all the domains and interactive situations). Diglossia

385 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015 implies a sociolinguistic hierarchy between a superior or high language variety and a subordinate or low language variety. Between the two there is a functional division of complementarity (Ferguson, 1959; 1977): the high variety is usually used in formal public and official situations and never in informal, private, family and everyday domains, where the low variety is commonly used. Diglossic situations are therefore very frequent and assume a vertical relationship between the two codes of the repertoire (one or the other code is used). Bilingualism in turn provides a horizontal relationship between two language systems, both considered functionally equal and having equal rights in terms of social communication efficiency (both can be interchangeable used) (Milani Kruljac, 1990).

2.2 Bilingualism with (double) diglossia and imperfect poliglossia

The phenomena of bilingualism and diglossia are not necessarily mutually exclusive: they can simultaneously be manifested and mutually supplemented (Fishman, 1967). Fishaman’s (1967) traditional distribution (diglossia with bilingualism, bilingualism without diglossia, diglossia without bilingualism, absence of diglossia and bilingualism or monolingualism) is not fully applicable to the Istrian situation. The Istrian linguistic reperotire is characterized by specifically strong language contacts between standard languages (colloquial varieties of Croatian and Italian), koines or regional dialects (the Chakavian dialect – one of the two components of the croatophone diasystem; the Istrovenetian dialect – one of the two components of the italophone diasystem) and local dialects. When a speaker uses Croatian, Italian and Istrovenetian dialect (two languages and one dialect), bilingualism with diglossia is encountered. If Croatian, Italian, Istrovenetian dialect and Chakavian dialect are used, bilingualism with double diglossia are achieved. Further on, if a speaker uses in everyday interactions the two official languages, the two regional dialects and one or more local idioms, the state of tetraglossia or pentaglossia is manifested. If an allochthonous language or a foreign language is added to the list, multilingualism is achieved (Milani Kruljac, 1990; 1996; 2003). The majority of interactional habits of the members of the Italian national community in Istria usually belongs to the category of bilingualism with diglossia, involving the statutary recognized equal status of Croatian and Italian and the functional diglossic differentiations between Istrovenetian dialect (subordinate low variety) and Italian (high variety). Italian is the national language of the members of the Italian national community, the language of formal education3 and certain formal situations. The Istrovenetian dialect is their first language, the language of identity and sociocultural belonging, traditions and intergenerational transfers and the expression of the whole cosmos of the original and autochthonous intangible cultural heritage of the Istrian italophone microcosm (Bursic Giudici, 2011: 66). Istrovenetia is even the favorite code for private everyday communication needs. The diglossic state of italophone speakers can be even defined as dialectal bilingualism, since the majority of the members of the Italian language community acquires Istrovenetian dialect as their first language, and only later master the Italian language (their second language), usually when they enroll in kindergarten or school. If they acquire Croatian after Istrovenetian (and before enrolling in the formal educational system), Italian is considered their third language (Milani Kruljac, 1990; 2001; 2003). Unlike Italian, Istrovenetian has an enormous communication prestige and ethnolinguistic vitality. However, Italian has an institutionalized status and institutional preservation is provided for it, while Istrovenetian is not institutionally protected. So, care and protection are directed only to the official language of national minority, and the efforts are negligent towards the inner diasystemic and heteroglossic diversity (Blagoni, 2002). In the italophone family, school and society domains in Istria, the Istrovenetian dialect represents the dominant language (L1) in the family domain, which is dialectophone; the Italian language is only ideally dominant in the school domain if the speakers attend Italian schools (where all the subjects are taught in Italian)4; the majority Croatian language, the first official language of Croatia, is obviously dominant in the wider social context (L2), as it is the code of social cohesion, essential for societal needs in all public official and informal domains (Milani Kruljac, 1984b; 1990; 2001; 2003; Milani Kruljac & Orbanic, 1989a; Strukelj, 1986), owning an undeniable social prestige because it covers almost all the communication functional ranges. Taking into account that a member of the Italian language community in Istria lives and works as a member of a minority group within the croatophone social majority, the functional use of Italian and Istrovenetian is limited to specific domains, while Croatian is the socially dominant language. Italophone speakers are required to know and use the Croatian language and become bilingual, which is not the case of croatophone speakers, because their learning of Italian is optional and depends upon the interest, motivation and attitudes (of parents and children) towards the Italian language and culture and their acquisition/learning (Orbanic, 1999). Milani Kruljac defines the global image as imperfect poliglossia (Milani Kruljac, 1990; 2001; 2003; cf. Skubic, 1984), since the term best describes the complex relationship between the Istrian croatophony and italophony, which implies the alternation of two high varieties, between which Croatian language is considered to be the first official language (first high variety, used in formal and informal interactions), while Italian is the second official (high) variety, or

386 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015 the medium variety covering only certain limited formal interaction domains, according to social role and communicative dominance relationships5. According to that limitation, Milani Kruljac (1990; 2001; 2003) talks even about double diglossia with potential bilingualism, which applies only to a limited number of speakers, mostly students of Italian schools over the duration of the educational process. When the educational process ends, it is usually converted into diglossia with latent bilingualism.

3. Language Planning in Istria: Status Planning and Corpus Planning

Language planning deals with the discursive creation of a language policy (Antia, 2000; Blommaert, 1996; Fishman, 1974; Haarmann, 1990; Haugen, 1966; Kaplan & Baldauf, 1997; Rubin, 1983). Language planning is subdivided in three main interrelated and complementary focuses: status planning, corpus planning and acquisition planning. Status planning regards the modifications of the societal and functional status of a language within a speaking community. Corpus planning deals with decisions and activities undertaken in order to codify and elaborate certain language functional forms and structures. Acquisition planning aims at increasing the amount of existing and/or potential speakers using a given language variety or enabling them to learn a language variety or acquire particular skills for implementing status and corpus planning (Kaplan & Baldauf, 1997; Coopler, 1989; Haugen, 1987; Kloss, 1987). The Italian minority is the only recognized national community in Istria that has a privileged position compared to other minorities (all reduced to ethnic groups) because of its autochthony (historical presence). The rights of the Italian national community are guaranteed by national and international acts and agreements6. The Statute of the Istria County guarantees the institutional Croatian-Italian bilingualism and the official status of the Italian language in all the Istrian areas where the presence of the Italian national community has been historically registered. Croatian and Italian are given equal rights for their usage in all the regional and local self-government settings. The Croatian-Italian bilingualism is the only Istrian bilingualism that has been institutionalized, objectified and theorized. The position of the Italian national community and the Italian language in Istria is determined by the durability of institutional recognition of the Italian language as the language of the social environment and the education system (there is a parallel system of education in Croatian and Italian) (Hrzica, Padovan and Kovacevic, 2011). Special protection is given to status planning of the Italian lanaguage (just one of the components of the Istrian italophone repertoire), especially in the formal educational system. In fact, in the majority schools (Croatian schools, where all the subjects are taught in Croatian), the learning of Italian, as the language of the social environment, is particularly ensured and especially encouraged or mandatory in the statutary bilingual municipalities, towns and villages. Furthermore, incentivated is the creation of the conditions for the use of the Italian language and the availability of its services. The functional use of Croatian and Italian and their literary and cultural prestige is shaped by sociolinguistic factors layering language use. Croatian, the absolute koine throughout the County, is the language that everyone understands and almost everyone speaks. Croatian might be used in all the communicative situations and is sometimes used even as a transregional or panterritorial koine (outside the borders of Croatia, in the bordering regions) (Filipi, 1989a; 1989b). speaking community) in Istria. Italian literary language, the sole and exclusive language of the Italian national community and simultaneously just one of the languages of that spaking community, has not managed to achieve sociolinguistic capillarity which an official standard literary language usually owns during the centuries (not even in the Fascist era) nor nowadays (Blagoni, 2007). Consequently to sociohistorical and geopolitical events, it has been institutionalized, although its application is considerably narrowed, restricted to certain interactive spheres and to the cross-border communication (mostly with Italian tourists coming to Istria during their holidays). Its use is characterized by innovative features resulting from linguistic contact and exchange phenomena, in particular with the Croatian language and the Istrovenetian dialect, that have shaped its specific regional substandard regional variants (Orbanic, 1999). After the mass emigration movement after World War II, the Italian national community in Istria, as well as the dialectophone Croatian community, have experienced the impact of linguistic homogenisation of the Yugoslav language policies. Moreover, the geographical and political distance and lack of direct connection with the continuity of the social dynamics with Italy, induced the italophone speaking community to reduce the use of Italian to reproductive schemes of educational, political and media institutions7, with only two types of sociolinguistic variation (the diaphasic and the dimesic ones). Written Italian is very present in extra-curricular domains, as well as in the media and literary competitions. Oral Italian, regarded primarily as the teaching language of Italian preschool and school (where the subjects are taught in Italian)8 and the language of cross-border cultural heritage is limited to rare language production occasions and is used in a very narrow part of oral communication, limited only to several domains within formal administrative and political settings, educational and media domains, cultural events organized by the Italian national community in Istria, to the Italian literary tradition, scientific activities and cross-border communication. Hence, two varieties are in use: Italian for

387 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015 literary-scientific-media purposes, which is mostly written and sometimes oral, but never conversational (used by educated individuals in formal contexts) and Italian used in occasional episodic communication, which is characterized by numerous traces of linguistic contact and is typical for speakers whose mother tongue in Istrovenetian or croatophone/chakavophone speakers educated in Italian schools (Blagoni, 2007).

4. Acquisition Planning

As already mentioned, according to the Croatian Constitution, members of national minorities have the right to be educated in their mother tongue. This right is respected only for the Italian national community in the Istria County. State educational curricula, established by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of Croatia, which apply to all school levels and commitments, are equal for Croatian and Italian schools (only the teaching language differs). In comparison to the Croatian school program implementation plan, subjects in the Italian schools possess substantial additions related to the Italian history, literature, language, art, music, geography, nature and society. The Italian educational process is considered one of the main fundamental instruments for the fostering, mantaining and supporting the institutional structure of the vitality of Italian culture, national identity and the renewal of tissues and use of the Italian language among young generations (Borme, 1990/1991). In order to increase its prestige on the social level, the learning of Italian as the language of the social environment is particularly encouraged in majority schools (Croatian language teaching schools). The teaching of Italian in the Croatian schools is being financed by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of Croatia from 2006. Previously, funds were allocated from the municipal and County budgets. In bilingual towns and municipalities schools (such as Buje- Buie, Rovinj-Rovigno, Vodnjan-Dignano, etc. ), Italian became a compulsory subject in 1973 and it is being taught from the first grade of Elementary school (aprox. age 6-7). In the other (partially bilingual or non bilingual) areas of the Istria County, it became optional from the first/second or the fourth grade (Milani Kruljac, 1987).

5. Conclusion

Even if the Italian language is institutionally protected and its teaching is encouraged in the majority formal education, the goal of its oral use in everyday socialization (Blagoni, 2007) was not reached. The ethnolinguistically vital Istrovenetian is the Istrian italophone speakers’ preferred code of social communication. Consequently, Istrian croatophone speakers learning Italian in their formal education are inable of using Italian in everyday socialization with their italophone peers, not because they are not able or inclined to do so, but because the italophone speakers prefer to use almost exclusively Istrovenetian (Filipi, 1989b). Nevertheless, Italian is still taught in Croatian schools and there is a highly positive social evaluation of Italian language learning, since its usefulness is undeniable in the context of tourism, travel, cross-border exchanges with Italy, academic and professional opportunities. Italian language as the language of the social environment was added instrumental values becoming the main motivation for its learning, taking into account the utilitarian purposes. Affective-emotional factors act as an added value and a means of strengthening the desire for arbitrary linguistic mastery and use, which affects the development of positive attitudes (Blagoni, 2002). The Italian language, therefore, occupies a symbolic linguistic space of a national language by which the members of the Italian national community are identified, and the value and potential of its public use have symbolic functions.

Footnotes

1. According to the latest official Croatian Census (2011), the 6. 03% (12,543) of the inhabitants of the Istria County are Italian, while the Italian language is the mother tongue of 6. 83% of them (14,205). See more about the Italian national community in Istria in: Blagoni, 2004; 2005; 2006; in press; Bogliun Debeljuh, 1985; 1988a; 1988b; 1989a; 1989b; 1989c; 1991a; 1991b; 1994; Borme, 1989; 1990/1991; 1991; Filipi, 1987; 1989a; 1989b; 1990; Jahn, 1999; Milani Kruljac, 1984; 1990; 2001; 2003; Suran, 1992a; 1992b, 1993a, 1993b, 1994/1995, 1995, 2001, 2003, 2008. 2. See more in: Crevatin, 1975; 1982; 1999; Filipi, 1993; 1994; 1996; 2004; Filipi & Bursic-Giudici, 1998; 2012; Kovacec, 1967; 1998; Muljacic, 1991; Orbanic, 1995; Scotti Juric & Poropat, 2012; Tekavcic, 1971; 1976; 1988. 3. Besides the Croatian schools (where all the subjects are taught in Croatian), the members of the Italian national community in Istria have the right to attend Italian schools (where all the subjects are taught in Italian), according the right to use publicly their language and for preserving the national and cultural identity. According to the disposition of the Croatian Ministry of Research, Education and Sports, special programmes had been designed for these schools whose teachings include notions of italian history, geography, music, arts, literature, grammar,

388 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015

science, etc. In the Republic of Croatia there are 14 italian elementary schools (with peripheral sections) attended by aprox. 1,800 students. There are three italian high schools (in Pula, Rovinj-Rovigno and Buje-Buie), attended by aprox. 750 students. Italian schools are attended not only by children members that are members of the Italian national community but even by the members of the Croatian majority and those coming from mixed families (croatophone father and italophone mother, or viceversa, etc. ), including other nationalities (Scotti Juric & Poropat, 2012: 423). 4. The members of the Italian national community do not necessarily attend only Italian schools. They attend even the Croatian ones. 5. Chakavian and Istrovenetian are the two low varieties, used mainly in informal domains. 6. Treaties between the Republics of Croatia and Italy; the Paris peace treaty (1947); Memorandum of understanding between the Governments of Italy, Great Britain and Yugoslavia (London, 1954); the Treary of Osimo (1975); the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom (1950); the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966); the Helsinki Final Act (1975); the Document of the Copenhagen meeting (1990); the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities' Languages (1992. ) and other treaties, like the International Labour Organization Convention (n. 111) concerning discrimination in respect of Employment and Occupation (1958); the UNESCO Convention Against Discrimination in Education (1960); the International Convention on the Elimination of All Form of Racial Discrimination (1966); the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) and documents without legal obigations, like the Declaration on Rights of Persons belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (the UN Declaration) (1992), the Hague Recommendation regarding the Education Rights of National Minorities (1996); the Oslo Recommendation regarding the Linguistic Rights of National Minorities (1998), etc. 7. Italian is regarded a veicolar language in an institutional sense, not owning an interactional prestige in the socio- cultural and intergenerational dimentions (Bogliun Debeljuh, 1985; 1988a; 1988b; 1989a; 1994; Borme, 1990/1991; Milani Kruljac, 1988; 1990; 2001; 2003 Milani Kruljac, 1985; 1986; 1987; 1995; 1996; 2001; Milani Kruljac & Orbanic, 1989a; 1989b; 1989c; 1989d; 1995; Orbanic, 1999; Scotti Juric, 1993; 1995; 1996/1997; 2003; Scotti Juric & Ambrosi Randic, 2010). 8. Besides the teacher-student class interactions, it is mainly related to the receptive, passive and unproductive everyday language activity outside the educational institution. The participants of the educational process (teachers and students) do not use Italian outside the classroom (in extracurricular domains) and, taking into account the frequent everyday use of Croatian and/or Istrovenetian, it can be assumed that there is a high probability that the average Italophone speaker will no longer (have the continuous need to) use the Italian language on everyday basis (which of course depends on single individuals), except in the various forms of cross-border cooperation, in communication with the Italian tourists/friends/partners and a few other circumstances (Milani Kruljac, 1990; 2003). The media partly enhance the continuity of the Italian language (mostly in the form of passive receptive exposure) and undeniably affect the maintenance of social bonds and exposure to cross-border cultural models, but fail to influence enough, to design and create productive habits of its use (Milani Kruljac, 1990).

References

Antia, B. (2000). Terminology and language planning: An alternative framework of practice and discourse. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins. Baldauf, R. B. , & Kaplan, R. (1997). Language planning. From Practice to Theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Blagoni, R. (2001). L'italiano in Istria: stato delle cose e riflessioni sociolinguistiche preliminari. Plurilinguismo, 8, Forum. Udine, 81-88. Blagoni, R. (2002). Status sociale e status istituzionale dell'italiano lingua minoritaria in Croazia. Note per un approccio diverso nella tutela dell'italofonia in Istria, Plurilinguismo, 9, Forum. Udine, 299-306. Blagoni, R. (2004). Pola citta’ plurilingue? Possibilita’, risorse e convenienze linguistiche tra ilari curiosità e proverbiale pessimismo. In: R. Bombi & F. Fusco (Eds. ), Citta’ plurilingui. Lingue e culture a confronto in situazioni urbane, Forum. Udine, 73-86. Blagoni, R. (2005). Eteroglossia in Istria tra gerarchia linguistica e ordine sociolinguistico. Studi italiani di linguistica teorica e applicata, 34, 3, 425-430. Blagoni, R. (2006). Istra u zrcalu povijesnih smjeranja. Identitet i strategije tumacenja odnosa covjeka, jezika i svijeta. In: M. Manin, Lj. Dobrovsak, G. Crspic & R. Blagoni (Eds. ), Zbornik radova sa znanstvenog skupa Identitet Istre: Ishodista i perspektive. Zagreb: Institut drustvenih znanosti Ivo Pilar, 463-483. Blagoni, R. (2007). Na tromedi covjeka, jezika i svijeta: antropolingvisticke perspektive jezicnih otoka u istri. Doctoral thesis. University of Zagreb. Blagoni, R. (in press). Na tromedi jezika, identiteta i etnicnosti. Zbornik u cast sedamdesetgodisnjice prof. Miroslava Bertose (2009). Pula. Blommaert, J. (1996). Language planning as a discourse in its own right: The linguistic ideology of a scholarly tradition. Language

389 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015

Problems and Language Planning, 20, 3, 199-222. Borme, A. (1989). Riflessioni sull'identita’ nazionale e sulla scuola del gruppo etnico italiano. Ricerche sociali, 1. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche, 9-26. Borme, A. (1990/1991). Binguismo e biculturalismo integrali: meta raggiungibile o chimera da vagheggiare? (Leggittimità e fattibilita’ di un progetto sociolinguistico per l'area istro-quarnerina. Quaderni, X. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche, 155-168. Borme, A. (1991). Aspetti di vita del gruppo etnico italiano. In: G. Padoan & U. Bernardi (Eds. ), Il gruppo nazionale italiano in Istria e a Fiume oggi: una cultura per l’Europa. Ravenna: Longo, 149-157. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1985). Proucavanje stavova prema dvojezicnosti i prema jezicima i govornicima jezika drustvene sredine uz odredivanje tipologije upotrebe jezika. MA dissertation. University of Zagreb. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1988a). Tipologija upotrebe jezika na dvojezicnom istarsko-kvarnerskom prostoru. Primijenjena psihologija, 9, 175- 180. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1988b). L’identita’ etnica nella scuola del gruppo nazionale italiano. Scuola Nostra, 20, 17-38. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1989a). Tipologia d’uso delle lingue nel territorio bilingue della zona istro-quarnerina. Scuola Nostra, 21, 85-96. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1989b). L'Istria plurietnica e plurilingue (riflesioni all integrazione culturale. Ricerche sociali, 1. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche, 67-72. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1989c). Etnolingvisticki identitet u plurietnickoj sredini. In: I. Strukelj (Eds. ), Uporabno jezikoslovlje. Ljubljana, 371- 376. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1991a). Riflessioni sull’identita’ etnica nel contesto del gruppo nazionale italiano di Jugoslavia. In: G. Padoan & U. Bernardi (Eds. ), Il gruppo nazionale italiano in Istria e a Fiume oggi: una cultura per l’Europa. Ravenna: Longo, 107-119. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1991b). Le istituzioni scolastiche del gruppo nazionale italiano (GNI) nella realta’ plurietnica dell’Istroquarnerino. Annales - Anali za istrske in mediteranske studije, 1, 203-212. Kopar. Bogliun Debeljuh, L. (1994). L'identita’ etnica. Gli Italiani dell'area Istro-Quarnerina. Etnia, 5. Rovigno-Trieste: Centro di Ricerche Storiche. Bursic Giudici B. , (2011). Complessita’ linguistiche dell’Istria meridonale: decadenza e mantenimento in contesto plurilingue. In: R. Scotti Juric & T. Stokovac (Eds. ), Studi interculturali: Interferenze linguistiche, didattiche e culturali nel territorio istroquarnerino. Dipartimento di studi in lingua italiana, Juraj Dobrila University of Pula. Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325- 340. Ferguson, C. A. (1977). Sociolinguistic settings of language planning. In: J. Rubin, B. H. Jernudd, J. Das Gupta, J. Fishman & C. Ferguson (Eds. ), Language Planning Processes, 9–29. Hague: Mouton Publishers. Crevatin, F. (1975). Per una storia della venetizzazione linguistica dell’Istria. Prospettive metodologiche per una sociolinguistica diacronica. Studi mediolatini e volgari, XXIII, 59-100. Crevatin, F. (1982). I dialetti veneti dell'Istria. Guida ai dialetti veneti, IV, 39-50. Crevatin, F. (1999). Note etimologiche italoromanze. Incontri Linguistici, 22, 177-179. Filipi, G. (1987). Alcuni aspetti diacronici del bilinguismo. Scuola nostra, 19, 171-179. Rijeka: Edit. Filipi, G. (1989a). Koine istriana, Jezici i kulture u doticajima - Zbornik 1. Medunarodnog skupa odrzanog u Puli, 156-160. Novi Sad: Talija. Filipi, G. (1989b). Situazione linguistica Istro-quarnerina. Ricerche sociali, 1, 73-82. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Filipi, G. (1990). Diacronical Aspects of Bilingualism. Proceedings of the Symposium Languages in Contact of the 12th International Congress of Antropological and Ethnological Sciences, 288-294. Zagreb: Skolska Knjiga. Filipi, G. (1993). Istriotski jezikovni otoki v Istri. Annales - Anali za istrske in mediteranske studije, 3, 275-284. Kopar. Filipi, G. (1994). Le parlate istriote. La Battana, 111, 83-88. Rijeka: Edit. Filipi, G. (1996). Dialettologia istriana. Scuola Nostra, 26, 113-121. Rijeka: Edit, Rijeka. Filipi, G. (2004). Istrorumunjski lingvisticki atlas. Pula: Znanstvena udruga Mediteran. Filipi, G. , & Bursic-Giudici, B. (1998) Istriotski lingvisticki atlas – Atlante linguistico istrioto, Pula: Znanstvena udruga Mediteran. Filipi, G. , & Bursic Giudici, B. (2012). Istromletacki lingvisticki atlas. Zagreb: Dominovic. Fishman, J. (1967). Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues, 23/2, 29-38. Fishman, J. A. (1970). Sociolinguistics: A Brief Introduction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Fishman, J. A. (1971). Societal bilingualism: stable and transitional. In: J. A. Fishman & R. L. Cooper (Eds. ), Bilingualism in the Barrio. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Language Science Series. Fishman, J. A. (1972). The Sociology of Language. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Fishman, J. A. (1974). Advances in language planning. Netherlands: Mouton and Co. Haarmann, H. (1990). Language planning in the light of a general theory of language: A methodological framework. International Journal of the Sociology, 86, 103-26. Haugen, E. (1966). Language conflict and language planning: The case of modern Norwegian. Cambridge: Howard University Press. Haugen, E. (1987). Language Planning. Sociolinguistics, vol. 1, 626-637. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. Kloss, H. (1987). Abstandsprache un Ausbausprache. Sociolinguistics, vol. 1, 302-308. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. Hrzica, G. , Padovan, N. , & Kovacevic, M. (2011). Drustvenojezicni utjecaj na dvojezicnost hrvatske dvojezicne zajednice u Istri i Becu. LAHOR, 12, 175–196.

390 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015

Jahn, J. E. (1999). New Croatian language planning and its consequences for language attitudes and linguistic behavior – the Istrian case. Language and Communication, 19, 329–354. Kovacec, A. (1967). Bilingvizam i aloglotski utjecaji na morfosintakticku strukturu jezika (na istrorumunjskom materijalu). Suvremena lingvistika, 4, 101-114. Kovacec, A. (1998). Istrorumunjsko-hrvatski rjecnik (s gramatikom i tekstovima). Pula: ZUM. Milani Kruljac, N. (1984). Bilinguismo e statuti comunali: la situazione Istro-Quarnerina. In: A. Necak-Luk & I. Strukelj (Eds. ), Prispevki konference ''Dvojezicnost – individualne in druzbene razseznosti'' (odrzane 13. -15. 09. 1984. ), 47-54. Ljubljana. Milani Kruljac, N. (1986). Analisi, interpreazione, prevenzione degli errori nell'apprendimento dell' italiano-lingua seconda. Scuola Nostra, 17-18, 17-40. Rijeka: Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. (1987). Insegnamento/apprendimento della lingua dell’ambiente sociale (L2) nel territorio istro-quarnerino. Scuola Nostra, 19. Rijeka: Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. (1988). La motivazione nello studio della lingua dell'ambiente sociale (L2). Scuola Nostra, 20, 73-86. Rijeka: Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. (1989). Matrimoni misti e bilinguismo nel caso istro-quarnerino. La Battana, 90, 7-18. Rijeka: Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. (1990). La Comunita’ Italiana in Istria e a Fiume fra diglossia e bilinguismo, Etnia. Rovinj: Centro di Ricerche Storiche. Milani Kruljac, (1995). Lingua ed identita’ nel contesto istriano. Istria nobilissima, Antologia delle opere premiate, 103-144. Rijeka: Edit, UIF-UPT. Milani Kruljac, N. (1996). Il bilinguismo nell'Istroquarnerino. Scuola nostra, 26. Rijeka: Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. (2001). Situazione linguistica. In: F. Radin & G. Radossi (Eds. ), La comunita’ rimasta. Zagabria: Garmond. Milani Kruljac, N. (Ed. ) (2003). L'italiano fra i giovani dell'Istroquarnerino. Pola-Fiume: Pietas Iulia-Edit. Milani Kruljac, N. , & Orbanic, S. (1989a). Lingua interferita e comunicazione disturbata. Ricerche sociali, 1, 27-56. Rovinj: Centro di Ricerche Storiche. Milani Kruljac, N. , & Orbanic, S. (1989b). Jezicni i kulturni metasistem (pocetna razmisljanja). In: I. Strukelj (Ed. ), Uporabno Jezikoslovlje, 334-341. Ljubljana. Milani Kruljac, N. , & Orbanic, S. (1989c). Sviluppo della competenza comunicativa nei bambini degli asili in lingua italiana. SOL - Linguisticki casopis, 8, 4, 1, 51-80. Zagreb. Milani Kruljac, N. , & Orbanic, S. (1989d). Italofonia nel triangolo istro-quarnerino. In: U. Bernardi & G. Padoan (Eds. ), Il gruppo nazionale italiano in Istria e a Fiume oggi. Una cultura per l'Europa, 79-100. Ravenna: Longo editore. Milani Kruljac, N. , & Orbanic, S. (Eds. ) (1995). Identita’-Alterita’. Rijeka: Edit. Muljacic, Z. (1991). Sullo status linguistico dell’istrioto medievale. Linguistica, XXXI, 155-170. Ljubljana. Orbanic, S. (1995). Status attuale delle comunita’ istroromene (indagine preliminare). Annales - Anali za istrske in mediteranske studije, 6, 57- 64. Kopar. Orbanic, S. (1999). Rana hrvatsko-talijanska dvojezicnost u mjesanim obiteljima u Istri. Doctoral thesis. University of Zagreb. Rubin, J. (1973). Language planning: Discussion of some current issues. In. J. Rubin, & R. Shuy, (Eds. ) Planning: current issues and research, 1-10. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. Scotti Juric, R. (1993). Analisi della competenza linguistica dei bambini a livello pragmatico. In: I. Strukelj (Ed. ), Minority languages at the border. Applied Linguistics, 1, 119-128. Ljubljana: Slovene Association of Applied Linguistics. Scotti Juric, R. (1995). La competenza linguistica dei bambini a livello morfosintattico. Ricerche sociali, 5, 63-79. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Scotti Juric, R. (1996/1997). Incidenze sociolinguistiche sulla competenza linguistica dei bambini. Ricerche sociali, 6-7, 27-49. Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Scotti Juric, R. (1998). Le funzioni della lingua: un excursus tra teorie e didattiche. In: I. Strukelj (Ed. ), Usvajanje in ucenje jezika, Uporabno jezikoslovje, 5, 160-172. Ljubljana. Scotti Juric, R. (2003). Bilinguismo precoce: funzione e usi linguistici. Rijeka/Pula: Edit, Pietas Iulia. Scotti Juric, R. , & Ambrosi Randic, N. (2010). L'italiano L2: indagini sulla motivazione. Rijeka/Pula: Edit, Pietas Iulia, Stega tisak. Scotti Juric, R. , & Poropat, N. (2012). Bilingual official policy and ideologies in formal interactions and development of plurilingualism and interculturalism in informal interactions among the young Croatian-Italian bilinguals in Istria. Journal of Teaching and Education, Vol. 1, No. 6, 415-432. Skubic, M. (1984). Italijanska etnija v Istri med bilingvizmom in diglosijo. In: A. Necak-Luk & I. Strukelj (Ed. ), Prispevki konference Dvojezicnost – individualne in druzbene razseznosti (13. -15. 09. 1984. ), 287 – 294. Ljubljana. Strukelj, I. (1986). Bilinguismo e relazioni sociali. Scuola Nostra, 17-18, 81-94. Suran, F. (1992a). L’etnia istro-veneta, quale minoranza nazionale italiana, tra politica ed etica. Ricerche sociali, 3, 83-111. Trst-Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Suran, F. (1992b). L’istrianita’ come relazione plurietnica. La Battana, 106, 90-103. Rijeka: Edit. Suran, F. (1993a). L’istrianita’ quale identita’ sociale. Ricerche sociali, 4, 15-36. Trst-Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Suran, F. (1993b). La famiglia mista: l'esempio istriano. Ricerche sociali, 5. Trst-Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche. Suran, F. (1994/1995). L'Istrianita’ come interpretazione. La battana, 111, 49-75. Rijeka: Edit. Suran, F. (1995). La famiglia mista nell’esempio istriano. In: N. Milani Kruljac & S. Orbanic (Eds. ), Identita’-Alterita’, 123-138. Rijeka: Edit. Suran, F. (2001). L’identita’ socio-territoriale di un’area storicamente plurietnica (tra nazionalismo e pluralismo etnico). Ricerche sociali, 10, 83-129. Trst-Rovinj: Centro di ricerche storiche.

391 ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015

Suran, F. (2003). Identita’ sociale e identita’ nazionale in Istria dal comunismo al post-comunismo 1945-2001. Storia urbana, 103. Suran, F. (2008). Istria quale regione storicamente plurietnica e multiculturale: un approccio sociologico. In: F. Suran, E. Deghenghi Olujic & R. Scotti Juric (Eds. ), Problematiche e prospettive della lingua e della cultura italiana in una societa’ in trasformazione, Atti del Convegno internazionale Trent’anni di studi di Italianistica a Pola: passato, presente, futuro. Galizana: Tiskara Nova Galizana. Tekavcic, P. (1971). Problematika istroromaskih studija. Dometi, 56-62. Rijeka. Tekavcic, P. (1976). Per un atlante linguistico istriano (Con speciale riguardo ai dialetti istroromanzi). Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia. 41-42. Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet. Tekavcic, P. (1988). L’istroromanzo in una recente pubblicazione linguistica. Linguistica, XXVIII, 111-124. Ljubljana.

392